They did it. They actually did it.
Mar. 14th, 2006 06:32 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sniffnoyEdit: Sean's story added in footnote 0.
Yet more added: Sean clarifies in an email to me.
They kicked Jack out of housing. Someone (anonymous, of course[0]) didn't like Jack going around wearing his boxers all the time, and they complained to Bill, even though they must have known that with Bill being strict now he'd take it to housing. And they kicked him out for it. This is a dark day for Tufts House.
In other news, a^n=a again: I proved it for n=7. You may recall that in both the n=7 and n=9 cases, I had proven that 3xy=3yx, so I only needed to prove it for rings of characteristic 3. Well, I had an insight the other day that allowed me to get it for n=7, though not 9, as it relies on 7 being 1 mod 3. I'll post it later if anyone really wants to see that algebraic mess. (Actually, I'll post it regardless, because I'll want to save it.) I've still found no real pattern. Blech.
-Sniffnoy
[0]I'd like to say it was probably Marissa, but I don't actually know that, of course, and I don't want to go accusing her of things she hasn't done. Though it's exactly the sort of thing she would do and the only person I can think of who would do it. Eh, so much for not accusing her of things she might not have done. OK, OK, it wasn't Marissa. What can I say, she's easy to blame. Regardless, this is what Sean has to say about it:
(Note: Sean's telling of Bill's being angry is almost certainly very exaggerated; Sean does that all the time. Also, The [Tufts House] listhost is an unofficial one created by Sean after Bill and Fiona decided to place the official one under moderation once again.)
From: Sean Robinson
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 23:09:56 -0600
Subject: [Tufts House] Bill
There was indeed a complaint directly to Housing about
Jack's state of dress. However, Housing merely mentioned it
at a staff meeting as something that had come up on their
radar. Regardless of the decency of Jack’s state of dress,
Jack did defy Bill’s order, and Bill has a right to enforce
that order as an authority figure. But instead of doing so,
Bill instead sent a letter to Housing the next day detailing
the incident, labeling Jack’s behavior as “public indecency”
and recommending Jack’s removal from Housing. Bill then
denied to Jack that he had contacted Housing about it,
telling him a student had, and waited for Housing to make a
move to kick Jack out. As one of his justifications for
Jack's ban, Bill states, and I quote, that Jack has "a
negative impact on the community." Make no mistake, Bill
says this not as a reflection of any student opinion, Bill
wouldn’t know, he has never asked. If he were to actually
listen to members of Tufts, he would see the tremendous
amount of support everyone has been kind enough to lend to
Jack. When Bill says “community”, Bill means himself and
Fiona. He told Jack and me that the reason he wanted Jack
out was because “Jack doesn’t make my job any easier.”
The “community” of Tufts, those whose Jack’s sense allegedly
offended, doesn’t actually get a choice in the manner. It
is one thing for Housing to take it upon itself to decide
our own standards; they can technically do so according
their rules. However, it is another thing for Bill to tell
us the decision they make is “for the good of the
community.” They couldn’t care less. Ask yourselves, has
either Bill or Housing, in any way taken stock of what you,
the community, think about this decision before claiming to
represent your opinion?
I gave Bill, if not Housing, the benefit of the doubt as you
did, Appie, you can even ask Jack that I refused to believe
Bill would do this. But any illusion that he was on our
side as he used to be in conflicts with Housing was quickly
dispatched when Jack and I went to talk with him. Bill was
angry, confrontational, and in vehement support of Housing’s
decision. Let it be clear, without Bill’s letter and Bill’s
advocacy Jack would not have been kicked out. Where Bill
used to support us, he now supports Housing. I have always
liked Bill, respected him, and thought him above Housings
irrational bureaucracy. But that is the old Bill. The new
Bill is who you saw incensed to the point where he could
barely control his rage as he handed down the new rules at
House Meeting, and is who you see now actively trying to
remove one of our most beloved, if dimwitted, members of
Tufts. I for one am sorry to see the old Bill go.
Sean
Harry,
I'm at the reg, so I can't say it this in person, but thanks
for the email, we really appreciate the public support.
Send an email to those places Scott sent if you've got the
time. I know Ben and I act as demagogues at times, speaking
in hyperbole, but that's just our role in this situation.
As there need to be devils advocates on one side, hyperbole
is useful in its own right. You are correct in that I
exaggerate Bill's reaction, but I assure you that he very
clearly and very openly told Jack that he was angry with
him, and not only didn't want him to live here, but did not
want him to ever come to Tufts again, and I quote
because "Jack makes my life more difficult." Bill's temper
was raised to the point where Fiona had to come calm him
down and suggested that we should leave because tensions
were too high to get anything accomplished.
However, despite our rhetoric, I'm glad that you support us
anyway. We need it. We may yet have a boxer protest, you
can wear a swimsuit or something if underwear is too far.
Sean
Yet more added: Sean clarifies in an email to me.
They kicked Jack out of housing. Someone (anonymous, of course[0]) didn't like Jack going around wearing his boxers all the time, and they complained to Bill, even though they must have known that with Bill being strict now he'd take it to housing. And they kicked him out for it. This is a dark day for Tufts House.
In other news, a^n=a again: I proved it for n=7. You may recall that in both the n=7 and n=9 cases, I had proven that 3xy=3yx, so I only needed to prove it for rings of characteristic 3. Well, I had an insight the other day that allowed me to get it for n=7, though not 9, as it relies on 7 being 1 mod 3. I'll post it later if anyone really wants to see that algebraic mess. (Actually, I'll post it regardless, because I'll want to save it.) I've still found no real pattern. Blech.
-Sniffnoy
[0]
(Note: Sean's telling of Bill's being angry is almost certainly very exaggerated; Sean does that all the time. Also, The [Tufts House] listhost is an unofficial one created by Sean after Bill and Fiona decided to place the official one under moderation once again.)
From: Sean Robinson
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 23:09:56 -0600
Subject: [Tufts House] Bill
There was indeed a complaint directly to Housing about
Jack's state of dress. However, Housing merely mentioned it
at a staff meeting as something that had come up on their
radar. Regardless of the decency of Jack’s state of dress,
Jack did defy Bill’s order, and Bill has a right to enforce
that order as an authority figure. But instead of doing so,
Bill instead sent a letter to Housing the next day detailing
the incident, labeling Jack’s behavior as “public indecency”
and recommending Jack’s removal from Housing. Bill then
denied to Jack that he had contacted Housing about it,
telling him a student had, and waited for Housing to make a
move to kick Jack out. As one of his justifications for
Jack's ban, Bill states, and I quote, that Jack has "a
negative impact on the community." Make no mistake, Bill
says this not as a reflection of any student opinion, Bill
wouldn’t know, he has never asked. If he were to actually
listen to members of Tufts, he would see the tremendous
amount of support everyone has been kind enough to lend to
Jack. When Bill says “community”, Bill means himself and
Fiona. He told Jack and me that the reason he wanted Jack
out was because “Jack doesn’t make my job any easier.”
The “community” of Tufts, those whose Jack’s sense allegedly
offended, doesn’t actually get a choice in the manner. It
is one thing for Housing to take it upon itself to decide
our own standards; they can technically do so according
their rules. However, it is another thing for Bill to tell
us the decision they make is “for the good of the
community.” They couldn’t care less. Ask yourselves, has
either Bill or Housing, in any way taken stock of what you,
the community, think about this decision before claiming to
represent your opinion?
I gave Bill, if not Housing, the benefit of the doubt as you
did, Appie, you can even ask Jack that I refused to believe
Bill would do this. But any illusion that he was on our
side as he used to be in conflicts with Housing was quickly
dispatched when Jack and I went to talk with him. Bill was
angry, confrontational, and in vehement support of Housing’s
decision. Let it be clear, without Bill’s letter and Bill’s
advocacy Jack would not have been kicked out. Where Bill
used to support us, he now supports Housing. I have always
liked Bill, respected him, and thought him above Housings
irrational bureaucracy. But that is the old Bill. The new
Bill is who you saw incensed to the point where he could
barely control his rage as he handed down the new rules at
House Meeting, and is who you see now actively trying to
remove one of our most beloved, if dimwitted, members of
Tufts. I for one am sorry to see the old Bill go.
Sean
Harry,
I'm at the reg, so I can't say it this in person, but thanks
for the email, we really appreciate the public support.
Send an email to those places Scott sent if you've got the
time. I know Ben and I act as demagogues at times, speaking
in hyperbole, but that's just our role in this situation.
As there need to be devils advocates on one side, hyperbole
is useful in its own right. You are correct in that I
exaggerate Bill's reaction, but I assure you that he very
clearly and very openly told Jack that he was angry with
him, and not only didn't want him to live here, but did not
want him to ever come to Tufts again, and I quote
because "Jack makes my life more difficult." Bill's temper
was raised to the point where Fiona had to come calm him
down and suggested that we should leave because tensions
were too high to get anything accomplished.
However, despite our rhetoric, I'm glad that you support us
anyway. We need it. We may yet have a boxer protest, you
can wear a swimsuit or something if underwear is too far.
Sean
